LETTERS: Reid shows stripes in sacking Romney

To the editor:

When Sen. Harry Reid was confronted by a reporter recently and asked if he regretted making false accusations against Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney from the floor of the Senate, Sen. Reid replied, “Romney didn’t win, did he?”

Now, after hearing of his retirement, we have sad-sack liberals trying to portray Sen. Reid as some sort of statesman and a paragon of Nevada politics. This is the same Harry Reid who ran the most false-information-spreading super PAC in the 2014 election. This is the same Harry Reid who didn’t miss a trick to take care of his family while letting Nevadans suffer.

And this is the same Harry Reid who just acknowledged with his Romney accusation that flat-out lying was OK, as long as it led to winning an election. I ask these liberal apologists, do you have children? Do you teach your children that anything goes, as long as you win? That you can lie and manipulate, as long as at the end of the game, you have the most marbles?

I think Sen. Reid has reinforced to the rest of America that Nevada is the bastion of hustlers, con men and ingrates. I laugh when I hear local politicians talking about Las Vegas being a “major league city” while embracing a senator such as Harry Reid. Being major league includes acting with dignity and honor, not diving to the lowest common denominator.

JOSEPH SCHILLMOELLER

LAS VEGAS

GOP’s bait-and-switch

To the editor:

I had no idea that incumbent Nevada Republicans were so clever (“State GOP takes page from D.C.,” March 30 Review-Journal). What a brilliant political strategy: win control of the state’s legislative and executive branches, then adopt the agenda of the defeated opposition.

Democrats are indeed faced with a tough situation: Losing the election, then being forced into adopting their own policies. Oh, the horror. So no matter what happens, the Democrats get their way.

Of course, it might be argued that if we wanted higher taxes, less efficient government and institutionalized class warfare (as in California), then we could have just voted a straight Democrat ticket last November in the first place. But this way, we can establish one-party rule, pretend it is bipartisanship and avoid all those nasty little arguments over issues and principles.

Maybe we shouldn’t bother voting. And maybe the intent of all of this is to make the average voter do exactly that.

JAMES MOLDENHAUER

NORTH LAS VEGAS

Uber no loss for Nevada

To the editor:

The Review-Journal has it all wrong when it comes to Uber (“Bill introduced to allow Uber to legally operate,” March 24). Throughout the country, Uber has violated state and local laws and has fought regulation. This is not because it is in the public’s best interest, but because it is cheaper for the company to operate that way.

When it comes to the safety of passengers, pedestrians and other drivers, we should not be cutting costs. And contrary to what the R-J would have its readers believe, the absence of Uber in the market has not hurt our state’s tourism or prevented companies from relocating to Nevada. Sorry, Uber. It’s time to start following the rules like everybody else.

MIKE COLLINS

LAS VEGAS